By adopting the intersectional feminist approach and mobilizing mixed methods, this research seeks to better understand partner violence in Mexico, both through a discourse analysis of the Mexican feminist movement and a quantitative multidimensional level of analysis by identifying the institutional, economic and socio-cultural factors associated with the risk of experiencing domestic violence. This research differs from the traditional feminist reflections made in Mexico because it takes into consideration gender inequality in interaction with other systems of oppression and subordination, mainly based on social class and ethnicity. Thus, it captures partner violence in relation to patriarchy, without reducing it to sociodemographic and behavioral indicators measured at the individual level, but by taking into account the structural context of gender inequality at the regional level. By integrating individual and contextual factors, this research attempts to reconcile the two major theoretical perspectives that explain partner violence, which are the family violence approach (that linger to factors at the micro level) and feminist approaches (which focus on the patriarchal structure, in other terms the broader context of gender inequality).
The results of the discursive analysis from the interviews with the feminists representing all three branches of the Mexican feminism (hegemonic, popular and indigenous feminism) revealed existing fractures within the feminist movement in Mexico (antagonism between institutionalization and autonomy of the feminist movement). In general, this analysis showed that the feminists’ gender struggle and their demands are consistent with the "ideal types" of the three branches of the Mexican feminism. Hegemonic feminism focuses mainly on the patriarchal structure of Mexican society and gender inequality when it comes to finding the causes of violence against women. For the popular feminism, violence against women is explained by both gender inequalities and the vulnerable economic situation. The discourse of indigenous women emphasizes the articulation of gender, ethnic and socio-economic inequalities. However, we found evidence that hegemonic and popular feminism seem increasingly sensitive to the intersection of systems of domination and oppression.
In addition, multilevel analysis using data from the National Survey of Dynamics of Relationships within Households (2006) revealed several important findings that deserve to be highlighted. Firstly, we show that differences in the prevalence of partner violence among Mexican municipalities are largely explained by their social composition, that is to say, by the characteristics of women and their relationship (micro level), rather than differences between the level of gender inequality in the Mexican municipalities measured by the GDI (gender-Human Development Index). In addition, the results show that indigenous women generally have lower rates of violence that the rest of mestizas Mexican women (majority group). Finally, in regard to the relationship between the context of gender inequality and domestic violence, and contrary with what would be expected, violence is higher in municipalities with higher GDI. This result seems to contradict feminist assumptions. It would seem that despite recent progress in women’s situation in areas such as health, education and income in Mexico, it has not been able to transform the gender order.